Re: REISER4 snapshot
> > user-space tools are thos of 2004.08.09-internal.testing? > > > ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4progs Do they include the libaal.patch and the reiser4progs-1.0.0-tree_scan.patch?
Re: REISER4 snapshot
Hello Domenico Andreoli wrote: On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 06:23:45PM +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: Hello hi Namesys has issued new reiser4 snapshot (http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2004.13.04). It is against 2.6.8-rc4-mm1. user-space tools are thos of 2004.08.09-internal.testing? ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4progs -[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://people.debian.org/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50
Re: REISER4 snapshot
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 06:23:45PM +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > Hello hi > Namesys has issued new reiser4 snapshot > (http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2004.13.04). > It is against 2.6.8-rc4-mm1. user-space tools are thos of 2004.08.09-internal.testing? -[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://people.debian.org/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50
Re: REISER4 snapshot
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 10:28:14PM +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > >Namesys has issued new reiser4 snapshot HOORAY! This is the best news in a while :) When will we see a directory listing by Apache2?-) And the somewhat gloomy question: What's the status on Faye's and Phil0u's bugs? -- mjt
Re: REISER4 snapshot
On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 12:28, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > Hello > > Namesys has issued new reiser4 snapshot > (http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2004.08.04). > It is against 2.6.8-rc2-mm2. > It is mostly bug fixes. > Look at http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2004.08.04/READ.ME for install > instructions So, is this is what will be sent to the main kernel as ready-to-go? Yay! -- Jonathan Briggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Viktors Rotanovs writes: > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > > > Also, does lack of sendfile in the current snapshot mean that Apache > > > will lose in performance when serving from Reiser4 partition? > > > > Hmm, what Apache uses sendfile for? > > > It uses it to send static content to client. Quote from Apache 2 docs: > > "In situations where Apache 2.0 can ignore the contents of the file to > be delivered -- for example, when serving static file content -- it > normally uses the kernel sendfile support the file if the OS supports > the |sendfile(2)| operation." > > "On most platforms, using sendfile improves performance by eliminating > separate read and send mechanics." Current reiser4 will be slower than hypothetical reiser4-with-sendfile, but not necessary slower than, say, ext3. > > Best Wishes, > Viktors > Nikita.
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Nikita Danilov wrote: > Also, does lack of sendfile in the current snapshot mean that Apache > will lose in performance when serving from Reiser4 partition? Hmm, what Apache uses sendfile for? It uses it to send static content to client. Quote from Apache 2 docs: "In situations where Apache 2.0 can ignore the contents of the file to be delivered -- for example, when serving static file content -- it normally uses the kernel sendfile support the file if the OS supports the |sendfile(2)| operation." "On most platforms, using sendfile improves performance by eliminating separate read and send mechanics." Best Wishes, Viktors
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Viktors Rotanovs writes: > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > >new reiser4 snapshot (for 2.6.0) is available at the > >http://www.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.12.23/ > >See READ.ME file there for more instructions. > > > > > What areas are still not ready for production? > How risky it would be to put, say, 2 e-mail users (cyrus imap and > nothing else) on reiser4 partition? I wouldn't recommend it, frankly. Reiser4 should first pass through more extensive testing (first internally, and then in something like -mm, or -wli) before it will be ready for "production". > Reiser4 works very very well on my desktop pc, so I'm eager to try it on > something bigger. Great. > > Also, does lack of sendfile in the current snapshot mean that Apache > will lose in performance when serving from Reiser4 partition? Hmm, what Apache uses sendfile for? > > Best Wishes, > Viktors Nikita.
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Nikita Danilov wrote: new reiser4 snapshot (for 2.6.0) is available at the http://www.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.12.23/ See READ.ME file there for more instructions. What areas are still not ready for production? How risky it would be to put, say, 2 e-mail users (cyrus imap and nothing else) on reiser4 partition? Reiser4 works very very well on my desktop pc, so I'm eager to try it on something bigger. Also, does lack of sendfile in the current snapshot mean that Apache will lose in performance when serving from Reiser4 partition? Best Wishes, Viktors
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger writes: > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > Hello, > > > > new reiser4 snapshot (for 2.6.0) is available at the > > > > http://www.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.12.23/ > > [...] > > broken-out core.diff split into separate patches > > 403 Forbidden > You don't have permission to access /snapshots/2003.12.23/broken-out/ on > this server. Thanks, fixed. > > > Carl-Daniel > -- > http://www.hailfinger.org/ > Nikita.
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Nikita Danilov wrote: > Hello, > > new reiser4 snapshot (for 2.6.0) is available at the > > http://www.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.12.23/ > [...] > broken-out core.diff split into separate patches 403 Forbidden You don't have permission to access /snapshots/2003.12.23/broken-out/ on this server. Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 01:14:46PM -0600, Steven Cole wrote: > On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 12:41, Alex Zarochentsev wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:41:45PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: > > > Mr. Demidov, if you put code that does not compile into our tree you > > > need to make the config option for it be invisible. > > > > There is such an option already, CONFIG_REISER4_FS_SYSCALL, > > seems it is off by default. > > Yes, but I the simple minded user that I am turned it on without reading > the Kconfig help carefully. Now, it's off, and it compiles. > > But, now for more interesting stuff: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] steven]# cd / > [EMAIL PROTECTED] /]# mkdir share_r4 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] /]# mount -t reiser4 /dev/hda11 /share_r4 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] /]# df -T > FilesystemType 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > /dev/hda1 ext3 241116 89449139219 40% / > /dev/hda9 ext320556656 16526188 4030468 81% /home > none tmpfs 126784 0126784 0% /dev/shm > /dev/hda8 ext3 241116 4711223957 3% /tmp > /dev/hda6 ext3 3012204 2507596351592 88% /usr > /dev/hda7 ext3 489992 70721393971 16% /var > df: `/share_r4': Value too large for defined data type I can't reproduce that. Do you see df errors each time you mount just created reiser4 fs? Can you provide additional information about your system: distro, libc which you used? My hypothesysis is that libc statfs or df itself want to convert "free inodes" result parameter which is __u64 to shorter data type. reiser4_statfs() sets kstatfs->f_ffree to a large value which is close to 2^64. > > I have recently run mkfs.reiser4 on /dev/hda11 with no options. > The reiser4progs version is 0.4.12. > > I made a local clone of the 2.6-test bk tree on the new reiser4 > file system and that worked OK. > > I then did a "time bk -r check -acv", twice for both reiser4 and ext3. > Here are the results for the second run for each (I neglected to > preserve the results for the initial bk -r check -acv): > > Reiser4: > real1m27.774s > user0m33.685s > sys 0m16.059s > > Ext3: > real2m55.179s > user0m32.752s > sys 0m5.835s > > Nice work. I'll try to break Reiser4 now. > > Steven > > > > -- Alex.
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 08:03, Yury Umanets wrote: Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. (Yes/No): Yes Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242fa, ip=0x200f77a1 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x60024302, ip=0x200f78e1 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f2671 done Synchronizing /dev/sda5...done I will fix it soon. Will Reiser4 be integrated into 2.6.0-test kernels anytime soon? This would reduce time between releases and would open up it to a wider audience for testing This is not a Namesys decision, I encourage you to ask Linus and Andrew about it though. I would like to see it go in as an experimental marked filesystem -- Hans
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 08:03, Yury Umanets wrote: > > > > Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. > > (Yes/No): Yes > > Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242fa, ip=0x200f77a1 > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x60024302, ip=0x200f78e1 > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f2671 > > done > > Synchronizing /dev/sda5...done > > I will fix it soon. Will Reiser4 be integrated into 2.6.0-test kernels anytime soon? This would reduce time between releases and would open up it to a wider audience for testing
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
Hello! On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:28:44PM +0200, Diego Calleja Garc?a wrote: > btw, I suppose this feature will be removed if/when reiser4 is merged?: > config REISER4_FS_SYSCALL > bool "Enable reiser4 system call" No. It will be fixed. > dmesg errors: > (fs/ext3/inode.c, 2728): ext3_write_inode: called recursively, non-PF_MEMALLOC! > Call Trace: > [] write_inode+0x45/0x50 > [] __sync_single_inode+0x28f/0x310 > [] generic_sync_sb_inodes+0x1c0/0x2e0 Hm. Interesting Thank you for the report. We will fix it. Bye, Oleg
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 09:52, Ian Wienand wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:22:33PM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote: > > Fixed some bugs. And finally reiser4 should compile on 64bit boxes > > (hm. somebody try it, as I am unable to build any 2.6 kernel for > > ia64). > > I built this with IA64 2.6.0-test4, it works but there were lots of > warnings (I can put up a log if you want it). This was on a dual > processor Itanium 2 box. > > First up, I tried a little test to make a few files, but once I had > unmounted the disk I couldn't re-mount it. > > --- example testing below --- > bash-2.05b# mkfs.reiser4 /dev/sda5 > mkfs.reiser4 0.4.12 > Copyright (C) 2001, 2002, 2003 by Hans Reiser, licensing governed by > reiser4progs/COPYING. > > Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. > (Yes/No): Yes > Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242fa, ip=0x200f77a1 > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x60024302, ip=0x200f78e1 > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f2671 > done > Synchronizing /dev/sda5...done I will fix it soon. Thanks for report. Regards.
Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:22:33PM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote: > Fixed some bugs. And finally reiser4 should compile on 64bit boxes > (hm. somebody try it, as I am unable to build any 2.6 kernel for > ia64). I built this with IA64 2.6.0-test4, it works but there were lots of warnings (I can put up a log if you want it). This was on a dual processor Itanium 2 box. First up, I tried a little test to make a few files, but once I had unmounted the disk I couldn't re-mount it. --- example testing below --- bash-2.05b# mkfs.reiser4 /dev/sda5 mkfs.reiser4 0.4.12 Copyright (C) 2001, 2002, 2003 by Hans Reiser, licensing governed by reiser4progs/COPYING. Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. (Yes/No): Yes Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242fa, ip=0x200f77a1 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x60024302, ip=0x200f78e1 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f2671 done Synchronizing /dev/sda5...done bash-2.05b# mount -t reiser4 /dev/sda5 /mnt bash-2.05b# cd /mnt bash-2.05b# time for i in `seq 1 1` ; do touch $i ; done real0m18.577s user0m5.910s sys 0m12.657s [do ls, all looks ok] bash-2.05b# umount /mnt bash-2.05b# mount -t reiser4 /dev/sda5 /mnt mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda5, or too many mounted file systems --- end example testing --- The console popped up with : reiser4[mount(15688)]: reiser4_fill_super (fs/reiser4/vfs_ops.c:1229)[nikita-2608]: WARNING: Wrong magic: 1 != 62533452 when I tried to mount it. I repeated this, but this time thought I'd try 'sync' before unmounting the disk; the sync command just hung and from that point nothing could seem to access disk, even on different partitions (so each program became unresponsive as soon as it tried to open a file). Then I tried the mongo.pl script just for something else, I used the parameters given in the sample config, i.e. FSTYPE=reiser4 BYTES=25000 FILE_SIZE=4096 It just seemed to hang in "PHASE Create" and after, say a minute or two, made the machine unresponsive in the same way as 'sync' above -- as soon as anything tried to access disk it just hung. So I retried this, and did a ls in the mounted directory just after I started mongo to try and poke at what it was up to; ls hung in the same way but this time I got messages : reiser4[ls(30795)]: traverse_tree (fs/reiser4/search.c:488)[nikita-1481]: WARNING: Too many iterations: 128 reiser4[ls(30795)]: traverse_tree (fs/reiser4/search.c:488)[nikita-1481]: WARNING: Too many iterations: 256 reiser4[ls(30795)]: traverse_tree (fs/reiser4/search.c:488)[nikita-1481]: WARNING: Too many iterations: 512 reiser4[ls(30795)]: traverse_tree (fs/reiser4/search.c:488)[nikita-1481]: WARNING: Too many iterations: 1024 reiser4[ls(30795)]: traverse_tree (fs/reiser4/search.c:488)[nikita-1481]: WARNING: Too many iterations: 2048 that just kept climbing ... I'm happy to help more, but I think a little more targetting debugging is required. Could you suggest what would be helpful for me to try? -i [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 12:25:58PM +0400, Yury Umanets a écrit: > Everything is fixed and new snapshot is in > http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.08.11/. > > See ./configure --help for new option --with-libaal. That fixes it, thanks! It can be debated whether --with-libaal=/foo/bar should imply LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:/foo/bar/lib or not (it doesn't seem it does right now), but at least it's now possible to build and install libaal + reiser4progs in a user tree without touching /usr. -- Cyrille --
Re: reiser4 snapshot
> Another little glitch is that the configure.in explicitly checks for 0.4.8 > while the provided libaal is 0.4.9. No biggie, just requires modifying the > configure.in and re-running autoconf (you might want to add a check against > that condition in your pre-upload QA scripts). yes, thanks, I have found and fixed it already. Vitaly Fertman
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 01:54:28PM +0400, Yury Umanets a écrit: > > It can be debated whether --with-libaal=/foo/bar should imply > > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:/foo/bar/lib or not (it doesn't seem it > I guess, it is not the job for configure script, but rather for > user/administrator. At least I don't even one project that do so :) fair enough I successfully built 2.6.0-test3 with yesterday's patch. I don't know when I'll be able to give it a spin, but at least here's some partial progress/success feedback, FWIW. -- Cyrille --
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Hello! On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 05:32:25PM -0700, Boris Tschirschwitz wrote: > I thought I'd give it a try on 2.6.0-test3-mm1. > Even with 'make mrproper' before compiling, I get the following error > message: > (Is there any interest in such error reports?) Yes, there is. > bobele linux # make bzImage > CHK include/linux/version.h > UPD include/linux/version.h > Making asm->asm-i386 symlink > CC scripts/empty.o > MKELF scripts/elfconfig.h > HOSTCC scripts/file2alias.o > HOSTCC scripts/modpost.o > HOSTLD scripts/modpost > SPLIT include/linux/autoconf.h -> include/config/* > CC arch/i386/kernel/asm-offsets.s > CHK include/asm-i386/asm_offsets.h > UPD include/asm-i386/asm_offsets.h > CC init/main.o > In file included from include/linux/unistd.h:9, > from init/main.c:18: > include/asm/unistd.h: In function `reiser4': > include/asm/unistd.h:400: error: `__NR_reiser4' undeclared (first use in this > function) > include/asm/unistd.h:400: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > include/asm/unistd.h:400: error: for each function it appears in.) > make[1]: *** [init/main.o] Error 1 > make: *** [init] Error 2 Hm, this is strange. __NR_reiser4 is clearly defined in include/asm-i386/unistd.h Probably you had that part of the patch rejected? Can you please verify? Bye, Oleg
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Am Dienstag, 12. August 2003 10:56 schrieb Nikita Danilov > > [know issues] > > 3) > > I'm also unable to build reiser4 as module: > > [...] > > include/linux/irq.h:69: warning: size of `irq_desc' is 28672 bytes > > LD [M] fs/reiser4/reiser4.o > > LD fs/built-in.o > > GEN .version > > CHK include/linux/compile.h > > UPD include/linux/compile.h > > CC init/version.o > > LD init/built-in.o > > LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > > > > arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o(.data+0x7c0): In function `sys_call_table': > > : undefined reference to `sys_reiser4' > > > > make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1 > > > > > > Are this know issues? > > Yes. Does it build as module with CONFIG_REISER4_FS_SYSCALL off? > > Nikita. No, it doesn't build with the following options: CONFIG_REISER4_FS=m # CONFIG_REISER4_FS_SYSCALL is not set CONFIG_REISER4_LARGE_KEY=y # CONFIG_REISER4_CHECK is not set # CONFIG_REISER4_USE_EFLUSH is not set # CONFIG_REISER4_BADBLOCKS is not set ** uname -rvmpio 2.6.0-test3-reiserfs4 #4 Tue Aug 12 02:59:22 CEST 2003 i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1900+ AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux ** gcc version 3.2.3 20030422 (Gentoo Linux 1.4 3.2.3-r1, propolice) ** Gentoo 1.4 Stable Henning
Re: reiser4 snapshot
On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 11:22, Cyrille Chepelov wrote: > Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 10:05:42AM +0400, Oleg Drokin a écrit: > > Hello! > > Hello, > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 05:32:25PM -0700, Boris Tschirschwitz wrote: > > > > > I thought I'd give it a try on 2.6.0-test3-mm1. > > > Even with 'make mrproper' before compiling, I get the following error > > > message: > > > (Is there any interest in such error reports?) > > > > Yes, there is. > > I have a problem: reiserfs4progs doesn't seem to pay attention to the > --prefix when it comes to locating libaal. --prefix is not the prefix libraries are looked at. It is the prefix of where package libraries and includes will be installed. > I configured libaal with > --prefix=/scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst and installed it there, then tried > to configure reiserfs4progs with the same prefix, and it still fails to > locate libaal. You need to let dynamic linker know, that some interesting libraries lie at some location. Edit /etc/ld.so.conf and there line /scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst Or set evn. variable LD_LIBRARY_PATH like the following: export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH > When I force it a little by prepending the call to > ./configure with suitable CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, it goes past locating libaal, > but chokes on locating . This will be fixed. Thanks. temporary cure is to specify CFLAGS durring make: make CFLAGS="-I/scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst/include/aal" > > I'll sure get past that, but it's a little annoying, and might get in the > way of distributors (depending on the way they package libaal, ie separately > or merged with the main reiserfs4progs package). libaal is planed to be used with another similar projects to as it contains useful utilities like device abstraction, etc. So, it is better to have it as separated package. But reiser4progs building may be automated. > > -- Cyrille -- We're flying high, we're watching the world passes by...
Re: reiser4 snapshot
On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 13:48, Cyrille Chepelov wrote: > Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 12:25:58PM +0400, Yury Umanets a écrit: > > > Everything is fixed and new snapshot is in > > http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.08.11/. > > > > See ./configure --help for new option --with-libaal. > > That fixes it, thanks! > > It can be debated whether --with-libaal=/foo/bar should imply > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:/foo/bar/lib or not (it doesn't seem it > does right now), but at least it's now possible to build and install > libaal + reiser4progs in a user tree without touching /usr. I guess, it is not the job for configure script, but rather for user/administrator. At least I don't even one project that do so :) > > -- Cyrille
Re: reiser4 snapshot
Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 11:31:57AM +0400, Yury Umanets a écrit: > > I have a problem: reiserfs4progs doesn't seem to pay attention to the > > --prefix when it comes to locating libaal. > > --prefix is not the prefix libraries are looked at. It is the prefix of > where package libraries and includes will be installed. yes, of course. However, you saw that it's not the only problem. > > When I force it a little by prepending the call to > > ./configure with suitable CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, it goes past locating libaal, > > but chokes on locating . > This will be fixed. Thanks. temporary cure is to specify CFLAGS durring > make: > > make CFLAGS="-I/scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst/include/aal" can't be done, as there is no Makefile until configure completes -- and it can't complete as it doesnt pay attention to things like CFLAGS="-I/.../include" ./configure I got past that, though. Another little glitch is that the configure.in explicitly checks for 0.4.8 while the provided libaal is 0.4.9. No biggie, just requires modifying the configure.in and re-running autoconf (you might want to add a check against that condition in your pre-upload QA scripts). -- Cyrille --
Re: reiser4 snapshot
On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 12:02, Cyrille Chepelov wrote: > Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 11:31:57AM +0400, Yury Umanets a écrit: > > > > I have a problem: reiserfs4progs doesn't seem to pay attention to the > > > --prefix when it comes to locating libaal. > > > > --prefix is not the prefix libraries are looked at. It is the prefix of > > where package libraries and includes will be installed. > > yes, of course. However, you saw that it's not the only problem. > > > > When I force it a little by prepending the call to > > > ./configure with suitable CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, it goes past locating libaal, > > > but chokes on locating . > > This will be fixed. Thanks. temporary cure is to specify CFLAGS durring > > make: > > > > make CFLAGS="-I/scratch/riesling/reiser4-inst/include/aal" > > can't be done, as there is no Makefile until configure completes -- and it > can't complete as it doesnt pay attention to things like > CFLAGS="-I/.../include" ./configure > > I got past that, though. > > Another little glitch is that the configure.in explicitly checks for 0.4.8 > while the provided libaal is 0.4.9. No biggie, just requires modifying the > configure.in and re-running autoconf (you might want to add a check against > that condition in your pre-upload QA scripts). Hello, Everything is fixed and new snapshot is in http://thebsh.namesys.com/snapshots/2003.08.11/. See ./configure --help for new option --with-libaal. Thanks for reports one more time.
